If it was hit by a missile, then there should be parts of the missile on the scene. One would also think that the point of missile impact would be scorched, at the very least. Anyone seen any pic of missile parts or evidence of a high temp event on the vehicle or on either of the occupants who were supposedly exiting the vehicle when it was hit?

That truck doesn’t look anything like the Pentagon did. (Yes, that is sarcasm) Armor may protect the occupants by it doesn’t extinguish fire.

The Israelis probably did fire at SOMETHING, but it sure as hell was not that vehicle. I mean, this does not pass the straight face test, people. I can’t believe that so many people are ignorant of at least a rough approximation of what explosives do in confined spaces.

Like the previous vehicles, this vehicle looks like it was damaged either by hand or in some kind of accident.

The blood on the door is obviously hand-smeared, not splatter. I wouldn’t be suprised if it wasn’t even human blood.

Sure looks more like an impact from a very large rock or hunk of concrete falling from a goodly distance, or from a rollover on a sharp corner of the same to me as well..

Another possibility is from a small (non-shaped)explosive charge sitting on directly on the roof of the vehicle, or a poorly designed IED charge fired from somewhere above and fairly close.

Either of which make the Pallies the most likely culprits.

No way in hades it was a missile fired from an aircraft, not even a ‘dud’ one.

At first I was having trouble reconciling the two photos of the same spot, one looking grey and the other looking like two years worth of rust…. I guess it could be white balance differences from the flash photo at night and natural light for the daytime one, but the daytime one STILL looks like a couple of years worth of rust, while the flash looks like fresh damage.

The way the hood of the vehicle is pushed to the side and the dented front fender is also consistent with a rollover/flip ….

The damage on the ‘jeep’ I flipped and rolled quite a few years ago is eerily VERY similar overall to the damage on the reuters vehicle, except I didn’t hit anything hard enough to penetrate, although I also did have a crack in the sheet metal right along the edge of the roof, just like the one in the photo.

It’s fascinating. Assuming that those Reuters people spent a normal life with an average consumption of action flicks where anything that gets hit by even the smallest caliber explodes spectacularly – why would they think that a real missile could inflict such little damage?

Maybe the IDF has taken to dropping cinder blocks on their targets. Upon further inspection of the interior shot, I don’t see any sign of whatever did the damage. No missile detrius, no concrete chunks, and no fire damage. But something hit that dashboard from the top, and presumably caused the winshield to shatter from the inside. Where is it?

As someone who works with explosives for a living, having conducted multiple post-blast investigations in Iraq, I can honestly say that it doesn’t resemble any munitions strike that I’ve seen.

Weapons leave traces – fragmentation from a warhead or artillery shell, telltale patterns from shaped charges, etc. These rockets would leave large sections of motor still intact (the fuel would be expended, leaving sections of the rocket with no explosive charges) Yet they’re not trotting out any parts alleged to be from the munition that hit the vehicle!

The hole certainly isn’t from a direct hit of any sort. A direct missle hit of any kind would leave the vehicle unrecognizable (all of them have a tendency to turn lightly armored vehicles inside-out, practically)

If it weren’t for past history, and the fact that Reuters has staged plenty of photographs before, I’d give them the benefit of the doubt and say they could have been near a chosen target and received a stray piece of fragmentation. Because of their habit of creating news where none exists, I’m highly skeptical that it was anything other than a faked scene.

Sorry, but here is what a 20mm cannon and small 2.75″ rockets can do to a target. This was not hit by anything I’ve ever worked with in my 8 years as a weapons tech for US Air Force. This includes experimental weapons. This was not anywhere near a direact hit. If they were hit then it was indirectly. A tank with 8 inch thick armor would show more damge than this.